This team isn't going to compete with anyone but the Marlins. We have 2 great players and they might not even be here in 2 years.. Think about it and be realistic, this team isn't going any where.

By trading Wright and Dickey, we get top prospects and this will be bad to say but losing games we get top dominating propects.

Follow the Nationals footsteps, and we will be a playoff team in the future. And yes that means 100+ loss seasons.

If they do not follow this then yay we'll be medicore for a long long time.

You guys need to understand that and I know but posting this thread you guys are going to bash me in, but its the truth.

11-18-2012, 02:48 PM

MetsJets0809

We have what the Nationals lacked- Good young pitching (besides RA). All we need are more bats, and we can compete. Why would you trade out best SP and our best bat when that's what we need? and for unproven commodities

11-18-2012, 02:48 PM

MetsJets0809

Pitching wins man

11-18-2012, 02:49 PM

MetsFanatic19

I agree 100%, though I would keep Wright just becasue he's still only 30 and could make an impact on and off the field for a good 8 years or so. Not syaing Dickey can't do that, just that I think there's a vibe that if we trade Wright, it will be so devestating that it will just linger longer than it would for Dickey.

This team can't pretend to compete anymore. We have a good core of young players to build around, so we should do just that. If you're going to lose, at least make some progress with young developing players while you're doing it.

11-18-2012, 03:01 PM

Sandman

For every Rays and Nationals team there are Royals and Pirates.

For every Yankee or Detroit team, you have flops like the Cubs and Mets , or this years Red Sox or Marlins.

trading two players isn't going to make or break the future. David Wright could also, easily, be apart of a 2-3 year rebuilding plan if thats what you want to do.

The Mets have made a lot of flop decisions in free agency. They've spent a lot of money that has not panned out. That doesn't mean its impossible to make good signings in the future to supplement what we have going on now.

and if you havent noticed we've had high draft picks for a few years now. We lost 88, 85, 83 and 92 games. Losing 100 will just put us over the hump?

11-18-2012, 03:23 PM

Patrick Ewing33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandman

For every Rays and Nationals team there are Royals and Pirates.

For every Yankee or Detroit team, you have flops like the Cubs and Mets , or this years Red Sox or Marlins.

trading two players isn't going to make or break the future. David Wright could also, easily, be apart of a 2-3 year rebuilding plan if thats what you want to do.

The Mets have made a lot of flop decisions in free agency. They've spent a lot of money that has not panned out. That doesn't mean its impossible to make good signings in the future to supplement what we have going on now.

and if you havent noticed we've had high draft picks for a few years now. We lost 88, 85, 83 and 92 games. Losing 100 will just put us over the hump?

Losing over 100 games leads us to recieve #1 overall picks. And you know how good those picks can be.. Getting a #1 overall pick would be perfect for the franchise, fans would want to come out and buy expensive tickets to watch that player play. I want a young explosive player on this team.

I dont know about you guys, but I hate building around free agency, I'm a firm beliver of building from the draft, then sign some vet players who can help.

We need a young exciting team for the fans, having our 2 best players at 29 (soon to be 30) and 39 with a losing team is not exciting. Sure we have some promising players but, it's not enough. We need to do something about this team because we are not in any shape to play in the playoffs.

Its all about sports management, a young exciting team that wins will make $$$$.

11-18-2012, 03:27 PM

MetsFanatic19

^While I somewhat agree, the age of a player and him being "exciting" don't exactly go hand in hand. I'm sure if you asked 100 fans, 90% of them would say their favorite players are Wright or Dickey. I'm sure when they're playing, more tickets are sold.

11-18-2012, 03:31 PM

Sandman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick Ewing33

Losing over 100 games leads us to recieve #1 overall picks. And you know how good those picks can be.. Getting a #1 overall pick would be perfect for the franchise, fans would want to come out and buy expensive tickets to watch that player play. I want a young explosive player on this team.

I dont know about you guys, but I hate building around free agency, I'm a firm beliver of building from the draft, then sign some vet players who can help.

We need a young exciting team for the fans, having our 2 best players at 29 (soon to be 30) and 39 with a losing team is not exciting. Sure we have some promising players but, it's not enough. We need to do something about this team because we are not in any shape to play in the playoffs.

Top 10 picks are still 50-50. Its not like the NBA. Especially when you still have affordability and signability issues. A draft like last year there were a handfull of guys who could have gone #1.

For every once in a generation player like Strasburg and Harvey there are guys like Matt Bush and Delmon Young. For every Strawberry and Doc Gooden, there are Shawn Abners and Paul Wilsons.

the Mets are rebuilding and they have been. They have had a lot of guys that are untradable. keeping Wright or Dickey won't delay that process.

11-18-2012, 03:31 PM

Patrick Ewing33

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetsFanatic19

^While I somewhat agree, the age of a player and him being "exciting" don't exactly go hand in hand. I'm sure if you asked 100 fans, 90% of them would say their favorite players are Wright or Dickey. I'm sure when they're playing, more tickets are sold.

I understand that, it makes sense. But it's sometimes to make the right decision, not about the fans. Also understand this, Wright is arguably the best 3rd base, hes not getting any younger, I'm sure he will want to win now. It's another thing to think about.. Will he actually want to sign here, or will he want to join a contending team. Let's not make this another Reyes situation and lose him for nothing.

11-18-2012, 03:35 PM

Patrick Ewing33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandman

Top 10 picks are still 50-50. Its not like the NBA. Especially when you still have affordability and signability issues. A draft like last year there were a handfull of guys who could have gone #1.

For every once in a generation player like Strasburg and Harvey there are guys like Matt Bush and Delmon Young. For every Strawberry and Doc Gooden, there are Shawn Abners and Paul Wilsons.

the Mets are rebuilding and they have been. They have had a lot of guys that are untradable. keeping Wright or Dickey won't delay that process.

We get top 10 almost every year, I'm talking about top 3. And if that 50/50 works out for the top 3, you know what that will cause.

That #1 pick is >>>>> #2-10 most of the time. There sometimes so good theres no doubt in mind there going to be one of the best.

It's all about making risks.

11-18-2012, 03:46 PM

YoungStuna

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick Ewing33

We get top 10 almost every year, I'm talking about top 3. And if that 50/50 works out for the top 3, you know what that will cause.

That #1 pick is >>>>> #2-10 most of the time. There sometimes so good theres no doubt in mind there going to be one of the best.

It's all about making risks.

That's NOT true. We've had the 13th pick in 2011, the 12th pick this year, and will have the 11th pick next year. We haven't had a top 10 pick since Harvey(7th).

4 WS Winners.
A-Rod 16 years later with his 3rd team
Erstad won a gold glove and was a key piece on the title team but I dont think he is the player you're aiming for
Straw and Chipper were cornerstones and their teams won the series within their first few years.

This isn't the NBA, NFL or NHL, the #1 pick isn't nearly as important.

11-18-2012, 04:54 PM

YoungStuna

I appreciate the research, but the drop-off from #1 to #2 is still pretty significant from a big picture standpoint as the career WAR values state.

Young and explosive, even if he is that, it's still gonna be 2-3 years at best, maybe longer.

11-18-2012, 05:08 PM

Sandman

Quote:

Originally Posted by YoungStuna28

I appreciate the research, but the drop-off from #1 to #2 is still pretty significant from a big picture standpoint as the career WAR values state.

No doubt -- when those unique players come along like Strasburg or Harper or Straw or A-rod or Griffey etc.. they are above and beyond. Not every year the #1 pick is a big prize, though.

Like this year, any number of guys could have gone number one -- combine that with signability & affordability and talent does not equal draft position one bit.

I don't disagree that you have the best odds when you pick #1, but in Baseball, the odds aren't overwhelming to the point that its necessary to tank. Especially when the notion here is that we need to be in the bottom 10% instead of the bottom 15-20%.

Management is ****ing up just as hard if they can't get quality players to build around in the top 10 or top 15.